Officials make alarming discovery outside of shutdown nuclear facility: ‘Significant’
“A legacy of industrial practices.”
by Veronica Booth, November 26, 2025
A dangerous fragment of radioactive debris was found outside of a
decommissioned nuclear facility in Scotland. The BBC reported that a
radioactive fragment categorized as “significant” was discovered around the Dounreay nuclear facility on April 7.
Radioactive particles can be
classified as minor, relevant, or significant. This is the first
“significant” particle found near Thurso since March 2022. The Dounreay
facility was an experimental nuclear site until particles of irradiated
nuclear fuel contaminated the drainage system. Now, the shores and seabed around Dounreay are heavily contaminated. According to the BBC, the decontamination of the site is expected to be complete by 2333.
The significant fragment serves as a poignant reminder of the importance of responsible radioactive waste management. According to the BBC, these
radioactive particles and fragments around Dounreay are not a threat to
people. Highly contaminated areas are not used by the public. Nearby public beaches have not contained any significant or large particles that would cause concern for people. In this instance, the U.K. government’s Nuclear Restoration Services and other entities are taking proper action to
decontaminate the site.
TCD 26th Nov 2025, https://www.thecooldown.com/green-business/dounreay-nuclear-facility-scotland-radioactive-waste/
Sir Keir Starmer to create commission with power to overrule environmental regulators through environmental red tape.
Matt Oliver, Industry Editor, 24 November 2025
Environmental quangos that object to nuclear power stations could have
their concerns overruled under Sir Keir Starmer’s plans to unleash a golden
age of nuclear. Under new proposals submitted to the Prime Minister, a new
commission would be created with the power to reconsider “novel or
contentious decisions” – overruling individual regulators if necessary.
In the report, the nuclear regulatory taskforce accused Natural England and
the Environment Agency of adding “disproportionate” costs to projects
by demanding design changes aimed at protecting nature.
Instead of addressing individual environmental concerns, developers could also be allowed to pay a large sum of money into a nature restoration fund. It comes after Sir Keir pledged to usher in a “golden age” of nuclear power following a major agreement between Britain and the US during Donald Trump’s state visit in September.
Telegraph 24th Nov 2025, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/24/nuclear-power-boom-forced-through-environmental-red-tape/
Does ‘fish disco’ show we’re dancing to the wrong tune on regulations?
“confected outrage about a fish disco”.
Hinkley Point C’s fish protections have been criticised as a
waste of money but environmental charities said the outrage was
manufactured.
For the twaite shad of the Bristol Channel, it has been a
strange few months. Ordinarily, few people bother with shad. Smallish,
silverish, a little like a less charismatic herring, generally they are
left alone. Not this year. Starting in May they have been tracked. They
have been chipped. They have been played some really odd sounds. And now, as they somewhat bemusedly navigate what has become known as the Hinkley Point C fish disco, they have been presented to the prime minister as an exemplar of all that is wrong with our nuclear regulations.
The Fingleton report on nuclear regulation is long and considered. Its 162 pages take in capital financing, nuclear risks and decommissioning obligations. But it was just a few paragraphs about fish that ended up catching the headlines.
“Hinkley Point C will have more fish protection measures than any other
power station in the world,” wrote John Fingleton, commissioned by the
government to find ways to make nuclear cheaper. “It has spent £700
million on their design and implementation,” he said. The outcome on
protected fish? “These measures would save 0.083 salmon per year, along
with 0.028 sea trout, 6 river lamprey, 18 allis shad, and 528 twaite
shad.”
“The government’s propaganda machine is working overtime to
perpetuate the false narrative that nature blocks development,” Joan
Edwards, from the Wildlife Trusts, said. It is, she said, “confected
outrage about a fish disco”. Every second it is running, Hinkley Point C,
which is still under construction, will suck in 134 cubic metres of
seawater. From three kilometres out, in the murky estuary, the water will
rush along pipes towards the reactor. There, the cold waters of the Bristol
Channel will meet the superheated waters of a steam turbine………………………………………………………………………………………….
Times 25th Nov 2025, https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/does-fish-disco-show-were-dancing-to-the-wrong-tune-on-regulations-99v2tsnvs
Britain will have to obey US orders on nuclear jets, CND conference hears.
23 November 2025, https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/britain-will-have-obey-us-orders-nuclear-jets-cnd-conference-hears
BRITAIN would need permission from the United States in order to use its nuclear deterrent, experts say, as the government goes forward with a £71 billion purchase of nuke-carrying US jets.
And increasing Britain’s nuclear arms stock will tie the country to President Donald Trump’s foreign policy goals, which disarmament campaigners say could bring us closer to the brink of disaster.
Speaking at an event organised by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in London on Saturday, experts, campaigners, and politicians condemned Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s pledge to buy at least 12 F15-A jets.
The planes, capable of carrying so-called tactical nuclear bombs, were not “properly costed” when the government first laid out the deal, only later revealing that their price was some £71 billion, CND general secretary Sophie Bolt said.
Describing Sir Keir’s “mad scramble” to increase spending after Mr Trump requested Nato members increase arms expenditure to 5 per cent of their GDP, Ms Bolt said: “There is a blank-cheque approach to nuclear weapons.
“There was no real proper costing for how much this would be. The health sector is constantly having to save here, save there. Whereas the [Ministry of Defence] will later just say: ‘Oh sorry, we’ve overspent.’
“This will not make us safer. They are US fighter jets. All the money is going to the US. And the planes launch US nuclear bombs, so that means they are basically under Nato command, meaning they are under the US nuclear umbrella of Nato.
“It’s the US that decides when and where these bombs will be dropped. And we are concerned that Trump is going to be gung-ho for these bombs.”
Discussing the planes’ so-called tactical nuclear bombs, she said: “They make the threat of nuclear war being made much more likely and the British government is totally at the heart of this.”
Okopi Ajonye, a researcher at Nuclear Information Service (NIS), agreed that there were many issues with the F35-A deal, saying the government “rushed into the decision” to buy the jets.
He said: “Acquiring these aircrafts was to show that the UK is contributing to NATO. That’s actually what drove this decision.”
Outlining the link between the genocide in Gaza and the campaign against nukes, Palestine Solidarity Campaign director Ben Jamal said the British public should “resist the process to renormalise Israel” after the October ceasefire.
And Your Party co-leader Jeremy Corbyn said: “The new nuclear weapons being promoted and proposed by the UK are intrinsically dangerous: the more weapons there are, the more danger there is that they will be used.
“Instead we should invest the funds into housing, health and education — and increasing, not cutting overseas spending.”
Navy’s legal threats in bid to keep nuclear pollution secret.
THE Royal Navy threatened legal action as part of a fierce, high-level,
behind-the-scenes battle to block publication of information about
radioactive pollution at the Coulport nuclear bomb base on the Clyde.
Files released to The Ferret reveal that over nine days in July and August, the navy sent 130 emails, held five meetings and made numerous phone calls urging the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) to keep details of the pollution secret. Naval officials repeatedly warned of legal action, spoke of the need to “calm some nerves” and said they were “deeply uncomfortable” with information proposed for release.
The National 23rd Nov 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/news/25642969.navys-legal-threats-bid-keep-nuclear-pollution-secret/
Rise in nuclear incidents that could leak radioactivity
Rob Edwards, May 25 2025, https://www.theferret.scot/nuclear-incidents-radioactivity-faslane/#:~:text=The%20last%20category%20A%20incident,dropped%20from%20101%20to%2039
There have been 12 nuclear incidents that could have leaked radioactivity at the Faslane naval base since 2023, The Ferret can reveal.
According to the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the incidents at the Clyde nuclear submarine base had “actual or high potential for radioactive release to the environment”.
But the MoD has refused to say what actually happened in any of the incidents, or exactly when they occurred. There were five in 2023, four in 2024 and three in the first four months of 2025 – the highest for 17 years.
Campaigners warned that a “catastrophic” accident at Faslane could put lives at risk. The Trident submarines based there were a “chronic national security threat to Scotland” because they were “decrepit” and over-worked, they claimed.
New figures also revealed that the total number of nuclear incidents categorised by the MoD at Faslane, and the neighbouring nuclear bomb store at Coulport, more than doubled from 57 in 2019 to 136 in 2024. That includes incidents deemed less serious by the MoD.
The Scottish National Party (SNP) described the rising number of incidents as “deeply concerning”. It branded the secrecy surrounding the incidents as “unacceptable”.
The MoD, however, insisted that it took safety incidents “very seriously”. The incidents could include “equipment failures, human error, procedural failings, documentation shortcomings or near-misses”, it said.
The latest figures on “nuclear site event reports” at Faslane and Coulport were disclosed in a parliamentary answer to the SNP’s defence spokesperson, Dave Doogan MP. They show that a rising trend of more serious events – first reported by The Ferret in April 2024 – is continuing.
There was one incident at Faslane between 1 January and 22 April 2025 given the MoD’s worst risk rating of “category A”. There was another category A incident at Faslane in 2023.
The MoD has defined category A incidents as having an “actual or high potential for radioactive release to the environment” in breach of safety limits.
The last category A incident reported by the MoD was in 2008, when radioactive waste leaked from a barge at Faslane into the Clyde. There were spillages from nuclear submarines at the base in 2007 and 2006.
There were also four “category B” incidents at Faslane in 2023, another four in 2024 and two in the first four months of 2025. The last time that many category B incidents were reported in a year was 2006, when there were five.
According to the MoD, category B meant “actual or high potential for a contained release within building or submarine”, or “actual or high potential for radioactive release to the environment” below safety limits.
The MoD also categorised nuclear site events as “C” and “D”. C meant there was “moderate potential for future release to the environment”, or an “actual radioactive release to the environment” too low to detect. D meant there was “low potential for release but may contribute towards an adverse trend”.
The number of reported C incidents at Faslane and Coulport increased from six in 2019 to 38 in 2024, while the number of D incidents rose from 50 to 94.
At the same time the number of incidents described by the MoD as “below scale” and “of safety interest or concern” dropped from 101 to 39.
The SNP’s Dave Doogan MP, criticised the MoD in the House of Commons for the “veil of secrecy” which covered nuclear incidents. Previous governments had outlined what happened where there were “severe safety breaches”, he told The Ferret.
“The increased number of safety incidents at Coulport and Faslane is deeply concerning, especially so in an era of increased secrecy around nuclear weapons and skyrocketing costs,” Doogan added.
“As a bare minimum the Labour Government should be transparent about the nature of safety incidents at nuclear weapons facilities in Scotland, and the status of their nuclear weapons projects. That the Scottish Government, and the Scottish people, are kept in the dark about these events is unacceptable.”
Doogan highlighted that the government’s Infrastructure and Projects Authority had judged many of the MoD’s nuclear projects to have “significant issues”, as reported in February by The Ferret. The MoD nuclear programmes would cost an “eye-watering” £117.8bn over the next ten years, he claimed.
He said: “If the UK cannot afford to store nuclear weapons safely, then it cannot afford nuclear weapons.”
Anti-nuclear campaigners argued that the four Trident-armed Vanguard submarines based at Faslane were ageing and increasingly unreliable. They required more maintenance and their patrols were getting longer to ensure that there was always one at sea.
“The Vanguard-class submarines are already years past their shelf-life and undergoing record-length assignments in the Atlantic due to increased problems with the maintenance of replacement vessels,” said Samuel Rafanell-Williams, from the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.
“There is a crisis-level urgency to decommission the nuclear-capable submarines lurking in the Clyde. They constitute a chronic national security threat to Scotland, especially now given their worsening state of disrepair.”
He added: “The UK government is placing the people of Scotland at risk by continuing to operate these decrepit nuclear vessels until their replacements are built, which will likely take a decade or more.
“The Vanguards must be scrapped and the Trident replacement programme abandoned in favour of a proper industrial policy that could genuinely revitalise the Scottish economy and underpin our future security and prosperity.”
Nuclear accident could ‘kill our own’
Dr David Lowry, a veteran nuclear consultant and adviser, said: “Ministers tell us the purpose of Britain’s nuclear weapons is to keep us safe.
“But with this series of accidents involving nuclear weapons-carrying submarines, we are in danger of actually killing our own, if one of these accidents proves to be catastrophic.”
According to Janet Fenton from the campaign group, Secure Scotland, successive governments had hidden information about behaviour that “puts us in harm’s way” while preventing spending on health and welfare.
She said: “Doubling the number of incidents while not telling us the nature of them is making us all hostages to warmongers and the arms trade, while we pay for it.
The secretary of state for defence, John Healey, told the House of Commons that he rejected “any accusation of a veil of secrecy”. He promised the SNP MP, Dave Doogan, that he would look into the allegations and write to him.
When pressed by The Ferret, the MoD declined to outline what had happened in the three category A and B incidents at Faslane in 2025. It has also refused to give details of earlier incidents in response to a freedom of information request.
An MoD spokesperson said: “We have robust safety measures in place at all MoD nuclear sites and we take safety incidents very seriously. Our nuclear programmes are subject to regular independent scrutiny and reviews.
“In line with industry good practice and in common with other defence and civil nuclear sites, His Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde has a well-established system for raising nuclear site event reports.
“They are raised to foster a robust safety culture that learns from experience, whether that is of equipment failures, human error, procedural failings, documentation shortcomings or near-misses.”
In 2024 The Ferret revealed earlier MoD figures showing that the number of safety incidents that could have leaked radiation at Faslane had risen to the highest in 15 years. We have also reported on the risks of Trident-armed submarines being on patrol at sea for increasingly long periods.
The promise, peril and pragmatism of Britain’s nuclear “renaissance”
LSE Shefali Khanna, Stephen Jarvis, November 21 2025
Nuclear energy’s capacity to help Britain meet its net-zero targets makes it a potentially attractive part of the energy mix. But do the high cost and complicated logistics of building new plants, as well as the emergence of renewable alternatives, make the government’s plans unviable? Shefali Khanna and Stephen Jarvis analyse whether ambition can be realised through delivery.
After decades of stagnation, nuclear energy is staging a comeback. The British government has called its plans for nuclear power a “renaissance”, with a goal to quadruple nuclear capacity by 2050. Projects like Hinkley Point C, under construction in Somerset, and the proposed Sizewell C, in Suffolk, dominate headlines, while small modular reactors (SMRs) promise to make nuclear energy cheaper, faster to deploy and safer. But Britain’s nuclear revival raises questions about how old technologies fit into a rapidly changing energy landscape.
From decline to revival
Britain was a nuclear pioneer. Its first commercial reactor, Calder Hall, opened in 1956 and symbolised postwar scientific ambition. Yet by the 1990s, nuclear energy had lost political and public support………………………………
The nuclear policy push
The British Energy Security Strategy , published in 2022, set an ambitious target of up to 24 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050, meeting roughly a quarter of projected electricity demand. To deliver this the government created Great British Nuclear, a body tasked with accelerating nuclear project approvals and supporting innovative technologies……………Much of the optimism centres on small modular reactors, nuclear units with capacities typically under 500 megawatts, compared with the large gigawatt scale reactors at traditional plants. SMRs can be factory built, reducing on site construction delays and costs that have plagued conventional reactors. In November 2025 a domestic firm, Rolls-Royce SMR, was chosen to build three SMRs in Wylfa, in Wales. And several foreign developers, including NuScale and GE Hitachi, based in America, are vying for contracts. If successful, Britain could become a global exporter of modular nuclear technology, a rare case of industrial strategy aligning with energy policy.
SMRs are still unproven at scale, however. While prototypes exist, none have yet achieved commercial operation in a liberalised electricity market. Cost estimates remain speculative and nuclear waste management challenges persist. The modular approach may simplify construction but not necessarily long-term decommissioning or waste storage.
Economics and financing are the biggest barrier
Despite renewed enthusiasm, nuclear power remains expensive. The cost of Hinkley Point C has risen from £18 billion ($23.6 billion) to over £35 billion ($45.9 billion), with completion delayed from 2025 until as late as 2031. Financing such large projects in a deregulated market is daunting, especially when renewables and battery-storage technologies have seen such rapid cost declines.
Britain is experimenting with a Regulated Asset Base model, which allows developers to recover some costs from consumers during construction, reducing investor risk but increasing public exposure. This approach could make projects like Sizewell C more viable, yet it effectively shifts financial risk from corporations to consumers, reigniting debates about fairness and affordability.
Safety, waste and trust
Nuclear energy’s social licence remains fragile. Surveys show rising support for nuclear power as part of Britain’s low carbon mix, but opposition can intensify when communities face the prospect of new plants or local waste storage. The government’s search for a geological disposal facility for radioactive waste has struggled. Transparent governance, community benefit schemes and clear communication about risks are vital.
A deeper question is how nuclear fits into a net-zero electricity system increasingly dominated by renewables. Wind and solar costs have fallen dramatically, making them the backbone of Britain’s decarbonisation strategy. But their intermittency creates a need for flexible backup and firm supplies, particularly during dark, still winter days. Here nuclear advocates see an opportunity. Yet the future grid may evolve differently. Advances in battery storage, demand flexibility and even low-carbon thermal sources (such as hydrogen or gas with carbon capture) could provide reliability without the inflexibility and long lead times of nuclear projects. From a systems perspective, nuclear’s value depends on whether it complements or crowds out other low-carbon sources of power.
A combination of offshore wind, interconnectors with Europe and demand-side management could offer cheaper resilience than large scale nuclear expansion. National Grid ESO’s Future Energy Scenarios suggest multiple credible pathways to reliability that do not rely heavily on new nuclear power.
The global dimension
……………………………… Britain wants energy sovereignty but depends on foreign partners for both capital and technology. Balancing national security with project viability will require deft diplomacy and strategic clarity.
From renaissance to realism
Nuclear energy could play a valuable role in Britain’s net-zero transition, but not at any cost. Policymakers must avoid treating it as a silver bullet or a national vanity project. Nuclear should be evaluated within a whole systems framework that considers economic efficiency, environmental impact and technological diversity. A pragmatic approach would prioritise completing current projects (such as Hinkley and Sizewell) efficiently before scaling new builds; rigorous cost transparency in SMR development; integrated planning with renewables and storage; and public engagement to rebuild trust through co-benefits, not just compensation.
The rhetoric of a “nuclear renaissance” is powerful, evoking a return to industrial confidence and scientific progress. But the real test lies in delivery. If Britain can demonstrate that modern nuclear projects are on time, on budget and publicly legitimate, it could indeed reclaim some global leadership. If not, this revival may join a long list of grand plans that stumbled on the realities of cost, complexity and public trust. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2025/11/21/the-promise-peril-and-pragmatism-of-britains-nuclear-renaissance/
Torness nuclear power station was opposed at every stage
Torness power station was opposed at every stage, according to the East
Lothian Courier on 14th November 1975. An alternative was put forward by an Edinburgh University professor. Calling for an end to the madness which
Torness represents, Professor Arnold Hendry of the Civil Engineering
Department claimed the proposals were unnecessary, a waster of money and dangerous. More than 60 members of the newly formed Scottish Campaign to Resist the Atomic Menace marched to the proposed site.
East Lothian Courier 13th Nov 2025
https://www.eastlothiancourier.com/
Lucky Dip: Drone companies await spending bonanza as UK’s Defence Investment Plan (DIP) to be revealed.
Plans already announced to ‘reconnect society with the military’ include the expansion of youth cadet forces, education work in schools to develop understanding among young people of the armed forces, and broader public outreach events to outline the threats and the need for greater military spending despite increased social challenges.
, Chris Cole, https://dronewars.net/2025/11/18/lucky-dip-drone-companies-await-spending-bonanza-as-defence-investment-plan-dip-to-be-revealed/
Following the government’s commitment to increase military spending and the publication of the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) in early June, the military industry has been keenly awaiting the release of the government’s Defence Investment Plan (DIP) which will layout military spending plans and other details for the rest of this parliament. Numerous reports have indicated that many planned projects are ‘on hold’ until the plan is finalised and published.
Defence minister Luke Pollard told MPs in June that the DIP will “cover the full scope of the defence programme, from people and operations to equipment and infrastructure”. Time and again ministers have promised that the plan will be unveiled in the autumn and so this now seems likely to be soon after the Budget of 26 November (although such promises are of course routinely broken).
How much?!
UK military spending was £60.2bn in 24/25 (around 2.4% of GDP), up from £42.4bn in 2020/21. In February 2025, the Starmer government committed to further increase military spending raising the budget to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 (estimated at around an extra £6bn per year – roughly the amount cut from the UK’s Aid budget) with ‘an ambition’ to reach 3% by the next parliament. At the NATO summit in June 2025, however, Starmer upped the ante, with a pledge to reach a ‘goal’ of 5% (3.5% on ‘core defence’ (estimated to be an extra £30bn per year) with 1.5% (around £40bn per year) on ‘defence-related areas such as resilience and security’) by 2029. Subsequently the government said it “expected to reach at least 4.1% of GDP in 2027”.
‘Whole of Society’
Importantly, alongside the increase in military spending, the Strategic Defence Review argued that ‘defence’ is now to be seen as a ‘whole of society’ effort and this may well be re-emphasised when DIP is published.
The plan is being billed as enabling the UK to be at ‘warfighting readiness’ and alongside equipment and weapons programmes, the public is being urged to be ”prepared for conflict and ready to volunteer, support the military, and endure challenges”.
Plans already announced to ‘reconnect society with the military’ include the expansion of youth cadet forces, education work in schools to develop understanding among young people of the armed forces, and broader public outreach events to outline the threats and the need for greater military spending despite increased social challenges.
And to top this off, the government is deploying the hoary old chestnut that military spending is good for the economy (despite such claims being persistently and thoroughly debunked).
Trailed Plans
While specific spending details remain under wraps, government announcements since the publication of the SDR have indicated some of the broad areas which will receive more funding:
Drones, Drones, Drones. In the Spring Statement, Chancellor Rachel Reeves stated that “a minimum of 10% of the MoD’s equipment budget is to be spent on novel technologies including drones and AI enabled technology.” Defence Minister Alistair Cairns indicated in July that there would be around £4bn spending on uncrewed systems – ‘Drones, drones and drones‘ as he put it on twitter.
To the ever-expanding list of UK drone development programmes, many of which are seeking funding decisions as part of the DIP, we can add Project Nyx which seeks to pair a new drone with the British Army’s Apache Helicopter.
Perhaps most significantly in this area, publication of the Defence Investment Plan may illuminate UK plans for a ‘loyal wingman’ type drone – now described by the MoD as an Autonomous Collaborative Platform (ACP) – to accompany the UK’s planned new fighter aircraft, Tempest. While some funding has already been allocated to develop smaller Tier 1 and 2 ACP’s, plans for the more strategic and no doubt costlier level Tier 3 drone have been placed on the back burner pending funding decisions. Will the UK go it alone and build a new armed drone (as no doubt BAE Systems hopes) or will it buy Australia’s Ghost Bat or one of the two drones currently competing for the US contract?
Integrated targeting web. Alongside new drones, the UK is developing a ‘digital targeting web’ to link, as MoD-speak puts it, ‘sensors’, ‘deciders’ and ‘effectors’. In other words commanders supported by AI will be networked with ‘next generation’ drones, satellites and other systems to identify targets to be destroyed by a variety of novel and traditional military systems. The aim is to rapidly speed up the time between target identification and attack. As Drone Wars has reported, several tests of various elements of this system (such as ASGARD) have been tested and it is likely that further funding for this programme will be part of the DIP.
Alongside this, there is also a desire to persuade some of the newer drone companies to open factories here in the UK. While Tekever has announced it will open a new site in Swindon, Anduril and Helsing seem to be keeping their power dry while awaiting news that they have secured government contracts before committing to setting up premises. Both companies have, however, set up UK subsidiaries and have launched PR campaigns to persuade ministers and officials of the efficacy of their products.
While drones are key for these companies, a huge increase in UK spending on military AI systems is also in their sights.
An AI ‘Manhattan Project’ endeavour. Despite continued and significant concerns about the military use of AI, particularly in ‘the kill chain’, ministers, officials and commanders seem convinced that a rapid integration of AI into all areas of the armed forces is urgent and vital. Just before stepping down as Chief of the Defence Staff in September, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin put his weight behind calls from Helsing co-founder Gundbert Scherf for a “Manhattan-Project for AI defence”. Arguing such a plan “would not cost the earth” (but putting it at around $90bn!) Scherf suggested four areas to concentrate on: a) masses of AI-enabled defensive drones deployed on NATO’s eastern flank; b) deploying AI-enabled combat drones to dominate airspace; c) large scale deployment of ai-enabled underwater drones/sensors; and finally, d) replacing Europe’s ageing satellites with (you guessed it) ai-enabled surveillance and targeting satellites.
Anduril is also not shy of lobbying in its own interests. Anduril UK CEO Richard Drake told The House, Parliament’s in-house magazine, that Anduril US was “very much happy with the direction [the SDR is] taking” but went on to publicly push to reduce regulation on the use of drones in UK airspace:
“For UK PLC to get better and better and better in drones and autonomous systems, they have to always look at their regulatory rules as well. Companies like ours and other UK companies can design and build these really cool things, but if we can’t test them well enough in the UK, that’s going to be a problem.”
Winners and Losers
While wholesale adoption of Helsing’s plan seems unlikely, there seems little doubt that the new AI-focused military companies will be among the various military companies who will be the lucky beneficiaries of the UK’s DIP. Meanwhile, the rest of us seem assured of spending cuts and tax rises.
First Minister John Swinney absolutely rules out changing SNP’s no nuclear stance
the proposal to develop new nuclear energy was both “economic and environmental folly” that would lead to more expensive bills.
First Minister John Swinney absolutely rules out changing SNP’s no nuclear stance saying ‘there is no way on this planet that I am going to change that policy’
By Scott Maclennan, John O’Groat Journal 20th Nov 2025
First Minister John Swinney has absolutely ruled out any change to the SNP’s position against nuclear energy saying: “There is no way on this planet that I am going to change that policy.”
He was speaking at the weekend at the adoption night for the party’s candidate for Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch Eilidh Munro in Dingwall alongside Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes.
The First Minister reiterated the position after it was revealed that Anglesey in North Wales – which has many objective similarities with Caithness – is about to receive a £2.5 billion nuclear boost.
That sparked Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross MP Jamie Stone to reignite his argument that it is not too late for Dounreay – but the SNP must lift its ban on new nuclear power.
“This is an important announcement which demonstrates two things,” he said. “Firstly, that the UK government is serious about establishing ‘a network of small modular reactors across the UK’ – as the Energy Secretary put it.
‘It’s brilliant for a small town like Wick’ – local opticians celebrate award win
“The second point, which will be of enormous interest to the far north, is the specific reference from the UK government to ‘sites across the United Kingdom, including Scotland’.”
But Mr Swinney rebuffed all of those points arguing instead that the proposal to develop new nuclear energy was both “economic and environmental folly” that would lead to more expensive bills.
“I don’t think the position on nuclear power is exactly a surprise,” he said. “We have been around for a long time when we have won Caithness, Sutherland and Ross and there’s absolutely no way on the planet that I’m going to change that policy because I think it’s economic and environmental folly.
“These nuclear stations are hyper-expensive so if people are going to get nuclear power stations put onto their bills then they ain’t seen nothing yet because these projects always go way over budget.
“So we’ve got the opportunity for low cost renewable energy in Scotland in abundance and we should seize that opportunity to do the right thing, fiscally and environmentally and the nuclear argument will just saddle people with exorbitant fuel costs for the years to come.”…………………… https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/first-minister-john-swinney-absolutely-rules-out-changing-sn-419801/
Wylfagasm! What does it tell us about Cymru?
18 Nov 2025, https://nation.cymru/opinion/wylfagasm-what-does-it-tell-us-about-cymru/
Some of the most unpopular politicians in the UK and Cymru, led by Starmer, rolled up to Ynys Môn on 13th November to announce that three Small Modular Reactors (SMR’s), to be designed by Rolls-Royce SMR are to be built at Wylfa by publicly owned Great British Nuclear, backed by £2.5 billion of public money.
Following the deferred gratification as the Hitachi project collapsed in 2019, the consequent media ballyhoo was euphoric, with the announcement being seen as at last confirming that nuclear is back on Ynys Môn, with up to 3,000 jobs expected during construction, and up to 900 jobs required to run the plant. The politicians of the UK, Cymru and Ynys Môn of almost all political colours welcomed the news. Starmer also announced that Cymru was to be an Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) zone, with 3,500 jobs to be created.
What’s not to like about nuclear at Wylfa?
A great deal, as I know from too many years of campaigning with PAWB (People Against Wylfa B)! Let’s be brief, though several volumes are needed to do justice to the objections.
The main argument used to justify nuclear by local politicians can be summarised in one word: JOBS! Jobs for Ynys Môn, which has haemorrhaged jobs for years, thus giving youngsters an opportunity to stay on the Island. Yes, Ynys Môn, like other economically bereft areas of Cymru, needs jobs to retain youngsters who have been drifting away in search of opportunities. But this has been a running sore for decades, and the chief focus on Ynys Môn has been to concentrate on the economic silver bullet of Wylfa since Blair’s Energy Review in 2006. So our youngsters have been let down for two decades, during which time a reliable job creation strategy could have been devised and implemented. The result is that jobs of any sort are accepted with very little robust questioning.
Poverty induces gratitude for a poisoned chalice.
Why is the chalice poisoned? The arguments against nuclear have been listed so many times that it is frankly staggering that mainstream politicians largely ignore them.
- No solution to the problem of radioactive waste which must be safe for millennia.
- Spiralling costs of every nuclear project, at the taxpayer’s expense.
- Too little, too late to mitigate climate change.
- The myth that nuclear is low carbon and safe.
- Huge long term environmental damage where uranium is mined.
- Risk of catastrophe as at Chernobyl, Fukushima, Windscale, Three Mile Island.
- Risk of malicious attacks by cyberwarfare or direct military attack in a dangerous world.
- Risk of nuclear proliferation
- Intrinsic link to military nuclear – the first Wylfa was built to produce plutonium.
Other issues can be added.
Continue readingLancaster University to create £2m nuclear power station control room simulator.
r. Funded through a £2 million grant as part of an £88.5 million
capital investment by the Office for Students (OfS) into Universities and
colleges across England, Lancaster University will address a critical gap
by developing a nationally-unique educational facility designed to train
future professionals in nuclear engineering, cyber security and related
disciplines.
Lancaster Guardian 18th Nov 2025.
https://www.lancasterguardian.co.uk/news/national/lancaster-university-to-create-ps2m-nuclear-power-station-control-room-simulator-5407049
Nuclear levy will increase UK energy bills from December
SMEs need to factor in a boost in their energy costs as the nuclear levy – a mandatory charge for both homes and businesses – is brought in by the Government.
.From next month, all energy bills will include the “nuclear levy”, a charge used by the Government to fund nuclear infrastructure. It is expected to add up to around £100 a year for small businesses, but this will vary with their energy usage.
Start-Ups 19th Nov 2025, https://startups.co.uk/news/nuclear-levy/
Campaigners come together to challenge Britain’s disastrous nuclear expansion.
CND 17th Nov 2025
- Political leaders, MPs, Trade Union leaders and faith communities urge Prime Minister to reverse decision to purchase US nuclear-capable fighter jets
- Purchase breaches international law, heightens nuclear risks and ties Britain closer to the Trump administration
- Call comes as report show chaos and spiralling costs of fighter jet programme
On Monday, 17 November, MPs, trade unionists and civil society figures handed in a letter to Downing Street calling on the Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, to rethink his decision to purchase 12 nuclear-capable F-35A jets, to be stationed at RAF Marham. The jets have been designed to launch deadly US nuclear bombs, now very likely deployed across Europe and in Britain.
This comes amidst increasing nuclear threats and breaches of international disarmament treaties. In the letter, signatories argue, “[f]ar from protecting the British population, your decision to buy US nuclear capable fighter jets, that can launch US B61-12 nuclear bombs, ties Britain even closer to the dangerous leadership of US President Donald Trump” and “increases the risk of such weapons being used in war.”
It goes on to state, “[w]e see this nuclear expansion as part of the war drive which is draining public funds away from essential public services and making the population poorer.”
The letter hand-in follows a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) that has exposed the chaos and spiralling costs already associated with government’s decision to buy nuclear-capable fighter jets from the Trump administration. The Committee’s report reveals that the Ministry of Defence had little understanding of the technical and financial implications of Britain joining NATO’s nuclear mission when Starmer announced the purchase at the NATO summit in June. PAC Chair described the MoD’s spending forecasts as “unrealistic.” The National Audit Office now calculates the full programme of 138 fighter jets could cost at least £71 billion, with even more – as yet unknown – costs involved in joining NATO’s nuclear missions.
The letter states, “[g]iven the grave consequences of this expansion, including Britain’s breach of international law, it is also deeply concerning that no opportunity was given for parliament to debate or vote on this decision before it was announced.”
The letter concludes by urging that “[i]nstead of pouring hundreds of billions into lethal weapons, action needs to be focused on tackling the underlying causes threatening our human security. This means reversing the devastating poverty, deprivation and crumbling public services that mark our communities, investing in sustainable homes, rebuilding our health and education systems, and funding a just transition through green jobs, skills and infrastructure.”
CND will be bringing together a powerful alliance of campaigners, trade unionists, student activists, environmentalists, and more this Saturday, 22 November, to discuss the next steps for the campaign to halt this disastrous nuclear expansionism. For an agenda and how to register, click here. ………………………………………………………………………………… https://cnduk.org/campaigners-come-together-to-challenge-britains-disastrous-nuclear-expansion/
UK’s New nuclear siting policy criticised by industry as ‘missed opportunity’
The highly anticipated National Policy Statement for Nuclear Energy
Generation EN-7, which will dictate where new nuclear reactors can be
deployed, has been published by the government, but it has been criticised
by the Nuclear Industry Association (NIA) as a “missed opportunity”.
New Civil Engineer 14th Nov 2025, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/new-nuclear-siting-policy-criticised-by-industry-as-missed-opportunity-14-11-2025/
1 This Month
10 March A LIVE WEBINAR THE REAL EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR POWER
What the Industry Isn’t Telling Us
1:00 PM Mountain, 2 pm Central, 3 pm Eastern. Live on the Keepers of the Water Facebook page
18 March Webinar @ 1 PM EST: An Assessment of SMR Projects: The Case of Canada
register for the zoom:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_o8BIIOUvQ2ONJR1nta65DQ#/registration
of the week – STOP SMALL MODULAR REACTORS IN CANADA
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- March 2026 (109)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 